Professional Documents
Culture Documents
SHORT COMMUNICATION
a
Manufacturing System Engineering, PO Box 800, Riyadh 11421, Saudi Arabia
b
Manufacturing System Engineering, Department of Industrial Engineering, King Saud University, Saudi Arabia
KEYWORDS Abstract In this paper, an improved quadratic programing formulation for the solution of
Location; unweighted Euclidean 1-center location problem is presented. The original quadratic program is
1-Center; proposed by Nair and Chandrasekaran in 1971. Besides, they proposed a geometric approach
Circle covering; for problem solving. Then, they concluded that the geometric approach is more efficient than the
Quadratic program quadratic program. This conclusion is true only when all decision variables are treated as nonneg-
ative variables. To improve the quadratic program, one of those variables should be an unrestricted
variable as it is presented here. Numerically we proved that the improved quadratic program leads
to the optimal solution of the problem in parts of second regardless of the size of the problem.
Moreover, constrained version of the problem is solved optimally via the improved quadratic pro-
gram in parts of second.
ª 2012 King Saud University. Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction and single facility minimax location problem. In the circle cov-
ering problem as shown in Fig. 1, it is wished to locate a new
1-Center Euclidean location problem is introduced originally facility with respect to m demand points so as to minimize the
by Sylvester (1857). The problem involves enclosing m known maximum Euclidean distance from the new facility to the de-
points in the plane within a circle of minimum radius. Con- mand points. Thus, the objective is to minimize the function
trary to what a person might think, the problem cannot be g(x, y) defined by:
solved by vision (or at least no one has yet been able to do
so) (Francis et al., 1992). gðx; yÞ ¼ maxf½ðx ai Þ2 þ ðy bi Þ2 1=2 : 1 i mg ð1Þ
This problem is also known as the circle covering problem,
minimum spanning circle, smallest enclosing circle (or disk) where (x, y) are the new facility coordinates; (ai, bi) are the de-
mand points (Pi) coordinates i = 1, . . ., m.
* Corresponding author. Tel.: +966 508622236. A problem equivalent to minimizing g(x, y) is to minimize
E-mail addresses: atamimi@ksu.edu.sa (A.A. El-Tamimi), Safe4k@ the maximum Euclidean distance (Z) as follows (Farahani
gmail.com (K. Al-Zahrani). and Hekmatfar, 2009):
Peer review under responsibility of King Saud University.
Min Z
Subject to : ½ðx ai Þ2 þ ðy bi Þ2 1=2 Z i ¼ 1; . . . ; m ð2Þ
Production and hosting by Elsevier
1018-3639 ª 2012 King Saud University. Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jksues.2012.04.003
162 A.A. El-Tamimi, K. Al-Zahrani
Figure 2 IQP vs. QP solution, m = 10. Figure 4 IQP vs. QP solution, m = 500.
164 A.A. El-Tamimi, K. Al-Zahrani
Moreover, the IQP is compared to a fast heuristic algorithm problem. In addition, constrained version of the problem is
proposed by Drezner and Wesolowsky (1980). D&W algorithm solved optimally via the IQP in parts of second.
(Drezner and Wesolowsky algorithm) is coded on MATLAB
(Mathwork Inc.) then, the comparisons are run. Large size References
instance problems; i.e., 500, 1000, 3000 and 5000 points; are
generated from a uniform distribution U(0, 1000). In all cases, Brimberg, J., Wesolowsky, G.O., 2002. Locating facilities by minimax
the solution values obtained by both methods were exactly sim- relative to closest points of demand areas. Computers and
ilar as shown in Table 3. However, the solutions are obtained in Operations Research 29, 625–636.
parts of second via both methods. Chandrasekaran, R., 1982. The weighted Euclidean 1-center problem.
Finally, the IQP is compared to the nonlinear program Operations Research Letters 1 (3), 111–112.
(presented in Section 1) to solve constrained; i.e., the center Das, P., Chakraborty, N.R., Chaudhuri, P.K., 1999. A polynomial
time algorithm for a hemispherical minimax location problem.
must or must not lie on a specific point; and unconstrained ver-
Operations Research Letters 24, 57–63.
sion of the problem. The novelty of the IQP is due to the solu- Datta, A., 1996. Computing minimum spanning circle by self-
tion time and its ability to solve the constrained version of the organization. Neurocomputing 13, 75–83.
problem. Thus, optimal solutions of the problems are obtained Drezner, Z., Wesolowsky, G.O., 1980. Single facility lp-distance min–
in parts of second. The nonlinear program leads to the optimal max location. SIAM Journal of Algebraic and Discrete Mathe-
solution in long CPU time; e.g. 5000 demand points are solved matics 1, 315–321.
optimally in more than 70 min. CPU times for IQP and nonlin- Elizinga, J., Hearn, D.W., 1972. Geometrical solution to some
ear program are shown in Table 4. In Fig. 5 the 10 demand minimax location problems. Transport Science 6, 379–394.
points instance solution when the center is constrained to lie Farahani, R.Z., Hekmatfar, M., 2009. Facility Location Concepts,
on a line having the equation x = y is illustrated. Models, Algorithms and Case Studies. Springer, Berlin.
Francis, R.L., McGinnis, L.F., White, J.A., 1992. Facility Layout and
Location: An Analytical Approach, second ed. Prentice Hall, New
5. Conclusions Jersey.
Li, L., Kabadi, S.N., Nair, K.P.K., 2002. Fuzzy versions of the
covering circle problem. European Journal of Operational
1-Center location problem is one of the best known location Research 137, 93–109.
problems. Geometric approaches and a quadratic program Matsutomi, T., Ishii, H., 1998. Minimax location problem with A-
are proposed in the literature to solve the problem. The distance. Journal of the Operations Research Society of Japan 41
authors who proposed the quadratic program concluded that (2), 181–195.
the geometric approach is more efficient than the quadratic Megiddo, N., 1983. Linear-time algorithms for linear programming in
program. This conclusion is true only when all decision vari- R3 and related problems. SIAM Journal on Computing 12, 759–
ables are treated as nonnegative variables in the quadratic pro- 776.
gram, which is not right. One of those variables should be an Nair, K.P.K., Chandrasekaran, R., 1971. Optimal location of a single
unrestricted variable as it is presented in the improved qua- service center of certain types. Naval Research Logistics Quarterly
18, 503–509.
dratic program. The comparison between the improved qua-
Ohsawa, Y., Imai, A., 1997. Degree of locational freedom in a single
dratic program and the original one shows that the improved facility Euclidean minimax location model. Location Science 5 (1),
quadratic program leads to the optimal solution while, the ori- 29–45.
ginal one does not. Moreover, the improved quadratic pro- Roy, S., Karmakar, A., Das, S., Nandy, S.C., 2009. Constrained
gram is compared to a fast heuristic algorithm proposed by minimum enclosing circle with center on a query line segment.
Drezner and Wesolowsky (1980). Numerically we proved that Computational Geometry 42, 632–638.
the improved quadratic program leads to the optimal solution Sylvester, J.J., 1857. A question in the geometry of situation. Quarterly
of the problem in parts of second regardless of the size of the Journal of Mathematics, 1–79.